29 May 2009

Daily Chat 29/05/09

On this day in 1660, Charles II was restored to the throne.  In 1913, Igor Stravinsky's Rite of Spring debutted in Paris, provoking riots.  In 1953, Tenzing Norgay and Sir Edmund Hillary reached the summit of Mt. Everest.  The Heysel Stadium disaster occurred on this day in 1985.  Celebrating birthdays:  Danny Elfman, Annette Bening, Rupert Everett, Melissa Ethridge, Noel Gallagher (I forget - is he the ½ sane one?), Massimo Ambrosini and Andrei Arshavin.  It's Democracy Day in Nigeria.  It used to be Oak Apple Day in England.

78 comments:

  1. "It's Democracy Day in Nigeria." And the funds allocated for the celebrations are still sitting in the account of my uncle, Viceroy Babatunde. He recently passed away and...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Noticed an odd-reading headline in todays paper..

    "Ministry of Defence admits use of missiles designed to kill everyone in buildings in Afghanistan"

    Call me old-fashioned but isn't this what missiles generally do?
    Has there been a new advancement, in missile technology, which means they can detect between the innocent and the guilty? Al Qaeda seeking missiles or summit?

    If there's a building with a mixture of targets and non-targets in it, then don't fire a bloody missile at it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. LordSummerisle29 May, 2009 09:02

    But it's just not playing the game, old boy. British missles should give Johnny Foreigner a fighting chance, what ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. An etiquette-guided missile would do the trick.

    "Control one, control one..missile lock will not engage, I repeat missile lock will not engage. It's recommending a strongly worded letter of complaint instead"

    ReplyDelete
  5. man with no name29 May, 2009 10:01

    "It used to be Oak Apple Day in England...."

    Fucking light fingered Blairs. I thought there was something missing.

    Every which way I looked there was a distortion in values, men wearing make-up and spraying smelly stuff under their arms.There had even been a suggestion that people had been seen talking to each other on the tube.The lack of Oak Apple day wreked havoc on the senses and sensibilities of the people

    Confused and alarmed as they were, they banded together and launced search parties. It was quickly established that the day had last been seen heading in the direction of .........."

    Come on Montana what the fuck happened to our Oak Apple Day - was it misplaced, lost, stolen or did some twat of printer forget and leave it off the calander?

    The answer is urgent my life is incomplete - every year I live is day short.

    If it is not found MP's will start claiming for Oak Apple Day bait and Oak Apple Day memorial homes............etc

    ReplyDelete
  6. They aren't 'apples' at all..they're a result of an abnormal outgrowth of plant tissues caused by parasitical insects. Really it should be "abnormal outgrowth of plant tissues caused by parasitical insects day" but we get plant-related spin instead.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Mendoza:

    I think they're also developing a good old-fashioned British missile which goes "tsk" when it gets near its target, turns round, and makes grumbling, dissatisfied noises on its way back to the launchpad where it suddenly erupts into incandescent fury in an enormous explosion of irritation at "bloody foreigners".

    ReplyDelete
  8. man with no name29 May, 2009 10:42

    Cheers Mendoza - just what I needed a parasitical insect who can read a calendar and now with a sense of grievance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. man with no name said...

    "Cheers Mendoza - just what I needed a parasitical insect who can read a calendar and now with a sense of grievance."

    Galling isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  10. @SwiftyBoy

    I think they're also developing a good old-fashioned British missile which goes "tsk" when it gets near its target, turns round, and makes grumbling, dissatisfied noises on its way back to the launchpad where it suddenly erupts into incandescent fury in an enormous explosion of irritation at "bloody foreigners".


    "Sir..one of our missiles appears to be bigoted"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dotteral - nice one!

    Oak galls were used as mordants in the dyeing industry and to make ink.

    Oak Apple day celebrated the return of the monarchy. It's thought to refer to the Charles II's hiding in an oak tree in the New Forest on his way to France at the end of the civil war.

    Not many people know that ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  12. @ Dotterel

    "Galling isn't it?"

    What the bloody French are in on it?

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Mendoza:

    "Sir, the moral compass on our missile appears to have malfunctioned"

    ReplyDelete
  14. man with no names dog29 May, 2009 11:18

    @ annetan42

    Mordants - they use piss in our part of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  15. @Annetan42

    "Not many people know that ;-)"

    It's also were the pub name 'The Royal Oak' orginates from.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Tried to post a comment on the cult thread asking merely if one of Ally's litigious faith groups hadn't recently lost a lawsuit in France.

    Pre-modded into oblivion. Bloody hell. Can't even obliquely refer to something that's an established fact?

    ReplyDelete
  17. "SwiftyBoy said...


    "Sir, the moral compass on our missile appears to have malfunctioned"

    This is why I'm such a big fan of..

    The Art of Liberal warfare.

    "So it is said that if you know your local community-leader and know your opponents electorate-promise based failings, you will negotiate without danger in battles."

    ReplyDelete
  18. @Mendoza:

    That sounds splendid, and much to be recommended over the current way of thinking, the Art of Half-Arsed War.

    Or to take Daimyo Takeda Shingen's famous "Fūrinkazan" (Wind, Forest, Fire and Mountain) and update it to current government military doctrine, our forces are equipped to be "fast as the mountain, silent as a wind, ferocious as a forest and immovable as a fire".

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Pre-modded into oblivion. Bloody hell. Can't even obliquely refer to something that's an established fact?"

    Premodded for that? Thats completely outrageous, you should email Georgina Henry or Seaton. That really is scandalous.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anon:

    "What the bloody French are in on it?"

    annetan42 said...

    "Oak Apple day celebrated the return of the monarchy. It's thought to refer to the Charles II's hiding in an oak tree in the New Forest on his way to France at the end of the civil war."

    It would appear so.............

    ReplyDelete
  21. @Jay:

    That the whole thread is in premod is very very weak on the Graun's part, distinctly lacking in spine I'm sorry to say.

    ReplyDelete
  22. PS Has Sandrine Leveque submitted the same "pornification" article twice? What a one-trick pony that young lass is, and no mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Ah that thread. Leveque is the biggest one trick pony going, really boring stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I see that Sandrine Levêque is taking a swing at Ally on her 'pornification' thread. She also cites the recently disgraced and ridiculed Joan Smith to back up her argument. Two rather unwise moves, I think - there'll be fireworks there, you mark my words.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I wouldn't mind but there's any useful evidence to back up what she says. I'm taking bets on how soon someone says..."How would you like your sister to be a pornstar?"

    ReplyDelete
  26. @Jay - yes, as Swifty points out (I should have been clearer), the whole thread is in pre-mod, not me personally.

    e-mail Seaton? Don't make me larf. Might as well e-mail the cat.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Seaton has been more receptive of late i think. But since the whole threads in premod its something of a moot point...

    ReplyDelete
  28. Sandrine Leveque submits a rehash of an ATL piece that wouldn't pass muster as a GCSE essay & straight away, there's someone saying how wonderful it is, as always. Sorry? You can only say this as the piece is the same article as always from this author.

    Still, as I've said on the thread, it'll generate lots of comments &, perhaps, serve to divert attention from our pigs in the trough, sorry elected representatives, & their other halves, who've been so promiscuously posting of late.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Joan Smith on the Waddya thread (now closed!)She suggests nice messages on CIF remain free, but abuse is charged as follows:

    "Mild personal remarks about the author's intelligence, appearance or
    sexual performance: £1 per post

    Distortions of columnist's argument or wilful misreading: £2.50 per post

    Misogynist, homophobic, racist or ageist remarks: £5 per post"


    Well its alright for you, isnt it Joan, you'd just claim it on hubby's expenses anyway...

    ReplyDelete
  30. OMFG. (That's the second time I've had to say that in 2 days.)

    No fine for MP-ist remarks, though?

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Jay:

    Comment is Free, but Abuse is Costly, eh?

    Anyway, fuck em, I'm gald I don't bother with it anymore to be honest. Don't recognise half the posters or their styles or opinions anymore, and I could not give one single shit about the issues they're so fervently debating.

    ReplyDelete
  32. An old ugly CSE holding Yorkshire queer who can't get it up his Sun reading bitch in Tuscany could be on for an expensive rant in Madame Smith's world.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Just tried posting on the cult thread out of curiosity really. Don't really want to say anything.

    My cif username is Scientologyisacult and I have had it a while.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Although in all fairness they may not let it through cos I didn't say anything worth reading. Perhaps I should go and try and post sommat proper like.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Original - I recognise Scientologyisacult!

    Nothing's been posted for an hour - I reckon the mods have gone to lunch. Being Friday an' all, the modding could get interesting when they return.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Original - I recognise Scientologyisacult!"

    Me too! Its a good moniker.



    "Comment is Free, but Abuse is Costly, eh?"

    Yeah, you get banned ;)

    ReplyDelete
  37. Original, my second attempt at a post made it in, but I don't see yours.:-P

    ReplyDelete
  38. Thauma/Jay - Thanks

    I originally had a different one but I went and forgot the password and also the email address I used so I had to make a new one. It was about the time that kid in London got arrested for waving a placard about saying scientology, obviously, was a cult and everyone was posting that after their comment on cif. So I nicked it for a new moniker. Which sort of makes a mockery of my current one on here (which comes from my gmail account when I am signed in).

    Haven't really posted on cif in a while and quite pleased I remembered the password seeing as I cant get back into the email I used to set it up (predictably forgot password to that too and am now locked out).

    I don't think my comment will get through, maybe I will try again and says something they can't dismiss as off topic.

    Ah I am nearly finished at work :-) (though I have nothing to do)...

    ReplyDelete
  39. Original - me too, off to enjoy the sunshine!

    ReplyDelete
  40. I'm just posting this as it's appeared (courtesy of SameTurn) on the atheist thread and I don't think it will be up long. I thought it might be appreciated over here - it made me laugh anyway....

    Dear Charlotte

    Fuck off, you charmless cunt.

    Best Regards.

    ReplyDelete
  41. "SameTurn

    29 May 09, 2:18pm (11 minutes ago)



    Dear Charlotte

    Fuck off, you charmless cunt.

    Best Regards."




    Classic.

    ReplyDelete
  42. @Jay/D'nibor:

    And still there with 17 recommends.

    ReplyDelete
  43. That's cos all the mods are busy with the cult thread.

    And neither of my comments got through. I think it's a lost cause.

    But the atheist article - wtf?

    ReplyDelete
  44. Cif Atheist thread - Someone called zabs just mistook dawkins for dworkin... do you reckon he knows who he is actually talking about?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Do you think SameTurn will actually be banned for that? Wasn't it that epithet that got you banned Jay?

    Will be interesting to see if there is going to be consistency in the moderating.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I see Cath got modded in the pornification thread. On that basis I expected mine & other's responses, which directly quote the offending post to have been deleted as well; as would happened to the many posts quoting Jay's brilliant Football analogy in Leveque's prvious submission on the subject, but this isn't the case.

    Typical Cif moderation.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Well, i called Blair a cunt repeatedly, about 4 times i think, in 3 separate posts, roughly. But yeah, same word, though i think they said i was banned because i ignored the premodding and continued the abuse (in reality i only found out i was in premod once i'd posted the next abusive post - so premod switched to ban - though im due for release tomorrow)

    ReplyDelete
  48. About bloody time too, Jay.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Well I am definitely not allowed to post using that name on that thread. Shame really, it's not like I just registered today with it to try and be clever.

    I avoided Leveque's thread - I just couldn't bare to inflict it upon myself.

    Ahh work over :-D

    Have a good weekend

    ReplyDelete
  50. don't worry original, others have done your work for you...........

    ReplyDelete
  51. Are you planning to return with a bang?

    ReplyDelete
  52. "About bloody time too, Jay."

    Yeah was about the worst month ever to be banned, constitutional reform has always been a high on my list and now all this happens, bloody Tony cunting Blair... But i did do an article for another news site on the abolition of monarchy with my spare time so the ban hasnt been completely wasted i suppose.



    "Are you planning to return with a bang?"

    I dont know if thats aimed at me or Original but i havent really thought about returning too much to be honest, i will prob be back posting a bit on Monday but no bang as such, just my usual rants i suspect. Be nice to be back though, there is so much nonsense on CIF these days it feels a bit like being sin binned and having to watch the team from the sidelines without being able to help out, rather frustrating.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Nega9000's just posted this on Leveque's thread; though the link's disappeared from the post now, for some unknown reason.

    Thought people might find it amusing:

    http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/oh_no_its_making_well_reasoned

    ReplyDelete
  54. Cannibal Dave is a motherfucking idiot.

    There. I feel better now.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Scientologyisacult
    oh there you are ! How's tricks ?! i'm off out in a bit, busy weekend too. Have a grand one.

    Monkeyfish (if you're there)
    Good luck tomorrow mate...

    ReplyDelete
  56. Going to Hay-on-Wye tomorrow!

    Should be good for a laugh!

    ReplyDelete
  57. what does this say about me

    ReplyDelete
  58. Cath got modded? Which post?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Kiz:

    29 May 09, 12:38pm

    In the porn thread. Sadly the Mods have woken up or I'd have been able to cut & paste its contents from the replies, but these have all been deleted.

    Basically, she got rather insulting; forget who to now, whilst claiming that the OP had never spoken to any women, because if hey had, they'd realise that Cath knew what they thought.

    I'd actually replied pulling her up for claiming to be able to speak for all women, but this is amongst the deleted posts.

    Mind you, whilst looking for an intact response, I did find her quoting her own Blog as being evidence that IUSW don;t represent sex workers:

    29 May 09, 1:52pm (about 8 hours ago)

    "MrJoe

    "Even if the ECP were not a genuine organisation, what about the IUSW?"

    They've got even less credibility than the ECP:

    http://toomuchtosayformyself.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/the-great-iusw-con/

    If there was a genuine prostitute-run organisation in this country campaigning for sex workers' rights and so on, I'd be more than happy to meet with them and listen to what they had to say. As it is, all we've got is a dodgy political group appropriating sex workers voices for its own advantage, and what's essentially an agency owners/punters lobby group masquerading as a union."

    ReplyDelete
  60. The Leveque article is based on the same two pernicious lies as the last one - that women are being "sexualised" (and shouldn't be), and that for a man to desire a woman sexually is to treat her as an inanimate object.

    Seriously - how can you "sexualise" women? People are sexual. It's part of being human. The idea of "sexualisation" can only based on the belief that sex is alien and harmful to women, and, frankly, even the stuffy old Victorians wouldn't go that far if the size of their families is anything to go by. It's far more dehumanising for people to assume you don't have a sexual nature, as many disabled people will testify.

    I'm completely fed up with the Guardian. They post nonsense, it gets taken apart below the line, and then they post exactly the same nonsense a couple of weeks later. Usually it's in support of some ill-thought-out new law New Labour are planning.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Oh come on Paddy... they don't mind women having sex... as long as it's vanilla!

    ReplyDelete
  62. Oh, I don't know Kiz. Remember the Bidisha piece saying that any woman who engages in heterosexual intercourse, or even has a relationship with a man, is a self-hating misogynist?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Kizbot, I think they don't mind women having sex, so long as no man enjoys it. It's just spite. Unfortunately it's spite that's so well-established and widespread that the notion that men hate the women they desire goes virtually unchallenged.

    ReplyDelete
  64. That's a radical political position, GPO1, based on some idea that all penetrative sex is bad for women because it reaffirms the patriarchy. Makes absolute sense to someone, somewhere, in another time maybe.
    But it's their choice, presumably, to live as they believe, even if most of us disagree?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Hey Bitterweed :-) Have a great one too... Just about to start watching The Wire (first series, not seen it before)

    ReplyDelete
  66. mschin,

    It was actually a failed attempt at humour.

    I'm fully aware that not all feminists; probably the silent majority of feminists we're speaking of here, support the position taken by Bidisha & co, it just seemed such a daft notion that Cif would allow her to publish such rubbish.

    ReplyDelete
  67. cos normally everything else they publish is, like, rilly great, innit?

    ReplyDelete
  68. Not unchallenged by me paddy (or wildhack... to name but just one other... and ooh annetan)... veritable cookie monsters that we are... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  69. Sorry GPO1, must have had a sense of humour bypass today without knowing it. Perhaps it was reading that porn thread or maybe that Invisible Sky Pixie wot dun it...
    Good news is, from a SOH point of view, the atheist thread has moved on to cystitis and the positioning of the female urethra.

    ReplyDelete
  70. GP01

    The "women who shag men can't be feminists" dipshittery was Bindel, not Bidisha.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Kiz, I got modded for suggesting a certain contributor (phazer?) had no experience of sexual relationships with real women, and should maybe lay off the porn for while....

    Personal abuse? Yes, probably, but I don't see why I should be expected to read all the nonsensical straw woman crap people write about me and not respond....

    ReplyDelete
  72. 'but I don't see why I should be expected to read all the nonsensical straw woman crap people write about me and not respond....'
    Fair enuf... and who doesn't get modded...
    Hope you had a great evening and looking forward to your posts to Ally... X

    ReplyDelete
  73. CathElliott
    100%.
    Give the creeps a good fucking talking to. Who cares if it bends "the rules" ? :)

    Original
    Enjoy !

    ReplyDelete
  74. Nite you guys. Orf down that London tomorrow. But not for the footy...

    ReplyDelete
  75. Oh, Cath! I thought the same thing about that guy!

    ReplyDelete
  76. It will be interesting to see if the following agreeable post survives Polly's red pen on the morrow

    TheModfather


    29 May 09, 9:28pm (about 4 hours ago)

    You know what the most telling line here is, and I'll ignore the usual trolls like waltz, soddball and the rest who have no interest in social democracy anyway, is Polly's "...putting (NewLabour) in a firmer grip of a few union barons who themselves represent a smaller fragment of the people than ever."

    Why do the union barons (a telling phrase) represent a smaller fragment of the people than ever before? Why have the unions been marginalised? Maybe it's because the industrial working class has been destroyed as a class.

    But who let that happen, Polly? We all know that Thatcher made it happen, but what were you and yours doing while it was happening, while the miners and the printworkers were striking?

    Yeh, you and yours were attacking Benn and those who cared about the workers, and doing your best to destroy the only chance the workers had.

    And now we have endless columns in the Guardian about the threat of the BNP. A bunch of idiot fascists I'd never vote for but they speak to a significant minority. And you and your liberal friends wring your hands and ask why.

    I'll tell you why. It's because you and your Guardianista liberals used the Labour Party to push through the identity politics shit you lapped up as bourgeois student wannabes back in 1968.

    Somewhere along the way you left the working class behind. Along with the concept of economic equality.

    But as long as the bourgeois liberals got richer and could dismiss the working class as reactionary, and salve your consciences at the same time, well, why the fuck should you care.

    I don't know who to despise more. The middle class fascists or the middle class liberals. The more I look from pig to sheep, and sheep to pig, the more they look the same to be honest.

    ReplyDelete